PSF

Physical Sciences Facility (PSF)
Project Execution Plan (PEP)

CRL-PLAN-PM-001, Rev. 0
Contents
Acronyms/Abbreviations .............................................................................................................................. v
1.0
Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Overview ................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Purpose ...................................................................................................................................... 3
1.3 Approval and Revisions ............................................................................................................ 4
2.0
Mission and Objectives ....................................................................................................................... 5

2.1 Mission Need............................................................................................................................. 5
2.2 Project Objectives...................................................................................................................... 6
3.0
Project Description .............................................................................................................................. 7
4.0
Organization and Responsibilities....................................................................................................... 8

4.1 Department of Energy ............................................................................................................... 9
4.1.1 Deputy Secretary of Energy ......................................................................................... 9
4.1.2 Under Secretary for Science ......................................................................................... 9
4.1.3 Office of Biological and Environmental Research Program Manager ......................... 9
4.1.4 Pacific Northwest Site Office Federal Project Director ............................................. 10
4.2 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory ................................................................................... 11
4.2.1 PNNL Director ........................................................................................................... 11
4.2.2 Contractor Project Director ........................................................................................ 11
4.3 Project Interfaces ..................................................................................................................... 13
4.3.1 Internal/External Interfaces ........................................................................................ 13
4.4 Integrated Project Team .......................................................................................................... 13
5.0
Resource Requirements ..................................................................................................................... 14

5.1 Budget Authority ..................................................................................................................... 14
5.2 Work Breakdown Structure ..................................................................................................... 15
5.3 Acquisition Strategy ................................................................................................................ 15
5.4 Life Cycle Cost........................................................................................................................ 16
5.5 Contingency Management ....................................................................................................... 16
6.0
Project Baselines ............................................................................................................................... 17

6.1 Technical Scope ...................................................................................................................... 17
6.1.1 Project Integration and Support (WBS Element 1.1.01) ............................................ 17
6.1.2 HRT Facilities (WBS Element 1.1.02) ....................................................................... 17
6.1.3 325 Building Life Extension Improvements (WBS Element 1.1.03) ......................... 18
6.2 Cost.......................................................................................................................................... 18
6.3 Schedule .................................................................................................................................. 19
7.0
Project Management Control and Reporting ..................................................................................... 20

7.1 Baseline Change Control Management ................................................................................... 20
7.2 Project Reporting ..................................................................................................................... 21
7.3 Project Meetings and Reviews ................................................................................................ 22
7.3.1 Quarterly Progress Reviews ....................................................................................... 22
7.3.2 Independent Reviews ................................................................................................. 22
7.3.3 Preliminary and Detailed Design Reviews ................................................................. 23
ii

8.0
Risk Management.............................................................................................................................. 25
9.0
Environment, Safety and Health ....................................................................................................... 26

9.1 Integrated Safety Management System ................................................................................... 26
9.2 National Environmental Policy ............................................................................................... 26
9.3 Safety Assessment Documentation ......................................................................................... 27
9.3.1 Preliminary Hazards Analysis ReportHRT Facilities............................................. 27
9.3.2 Documented Safety Analysis325 Building ............................................................ 27
9.3.3 Emergency Preparedness Hazards Assessment .......................................................... 27
10.0 Technical Analyses ........................................................................................................................... 28

10.1 Value Engineering ................................................................................................................... 28
10.2 System Engineering ................................................................................................................. 28
10.3 Configuration Management ..................................................................................................... 28
10.4 Sustainable Building Design ................................................................................................... 28
10.5 Reliability, Maintainability and Operability............................................................................ 29
10.6 Quality Assurance ................................................................................................................... 29
11.0 Transition to Operations .................................................................................................................... 30
11.1 Final Inspection and Acceptance ............................................................................................. 30
11.2 Transition to Operations .......................................................................................................... 30
11.3 Lessons Learned ...................................................................................................................... 31
11.4 Project Closeout ...................................................................................................................... 31
Attachment A Memorandum From Acquisition Executive on CD-1-R .................................................. 33
Attachment B Integrated Project Team Charter ....................................................................................... 38
Attachment C Summary of DOE Order 413.3A Requirements and Applicability to the PSF Project .... 43
iii

Figures
1.
2
3
4
5
6
7
Facilities Included in the CRL Projects Scope of Work. ........................................................................ 2

CRL Work Breakdown Structure ............................................................................................................ 3
PSF New Construction Site Plan ............................................................................................................. 3
PSF Project Management Structure ........................................................................................................ 8
Key Project Staff Roles and Responsibilities ........................................................................................ 11
Level-3 PSF Project Work Breakdown Structure ................................................................................. 15
PSF Project Cost Estimate by Work Breakdown Structure................................................................... 18
Tables
1
2
3
4
5
6
Total Project BA/BO Requirements ...................................................................................................... 14

Total Project Annual Funding Requirements ........................................................................................ 14
Critical Decision Approval Authority ................................................................................................... 16
PSF Project Level 1 Milestones ............................................................................................................ 19
PSF Project Level 2 Milestones ............................................................................................................ 19
Summary Baseline Change Control Thresholds ................................................................................... 21
iv

Acronyms/Abbreviations
325 Building
3410 Building
3420 Building
3425 Building
3430 Building
Shielded Operations
Materials Science & Technology
Radiation Detection
Ultra-low Background/Deep Lab
Ultra-Trace
AE
A/E
acquisition executive
architectural/engineering
BA
BCP
BO
BSF
Budget Authority
Baseline Change Proposal
Budget Obligation
Biological Sciences Facility
CCB
CD
CPD
CRL
CSF
Change Control Board

Critical Decision
Contractor Project Director
Capability Replacement Laboratory
Computational Sciences Facility
DHS
DOE
DOE-RL
DSA
Department of Homeland Security

U.S. Department of Energy
DOE Richland Operations Office
Documented Safety Analysis
EA
EIR
EM
EPHA
ESAAB
ES&H
EVMS
Environmental Assessment
External Independent Review
DOE Office of Environmental Management
Emergency Preparedness Hazards Assessment
Energy Systems Acquisition Advisory Board
Environmental, Safety and Health
Earned Value Management System
FPD
Federal Project Director
HAR
HRT
HVAC
Hazards Analysis Report

Horn Rapids Triangle
heating, ventilation and air conditioning
IES&H
IOPS
IPR
IPT
Integrated Environment, Safety and Health

Integrated Operations System
Independent Project Review
Integrated Project Team
LEED
Leadership in Energy and Efficiency Design

M&O
Management and Operations
NEPA
NNSA
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

National Nuclear Security Administration
OECM
Office of Engineering and Construction Management
PARS
PEP
PIP
PMB
PMP
PNNL
PNSO
PSF
Project Assessment and Reporting System

Project Execution Plan
Project Implementation Plan
Performance Measurement Baseline
Project Management Plan
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
Pacific Northwest Site Office
Physical Sciences Facility
QAP
QAPD
Quality Assurance Plan

Quality Assurance Program Description
RMP
RPL
Risk Management Plan

Radiochemical Processing Laboratory
SAE
SBMS
SC
SCC
Secretarial Acquisition Executive

Standards-Based Management System
DOE Office of Science
structures, systems and components
TEC
TPC
total estimated cost

total project cost
VE
values engineering
WBS
Work Breakdown Structure
vi

1.0 Introduction
1.1 Overview
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is required under the Tri-Party Agreement with its regulators to
complete surplus facility disposition and remedial action clean-up of the Hanford Site 300 Area by 2015.
With about half of the space used by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) in the 300 Area
supporting their research programs, the DOE Office of Science (SC), the National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA), and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have undertaken the
Capability Replacement Laboratory Projects (CRL). The CRL projects will ensure the long-term viability
of the PNNL and preserve the following vital research capabilities:
Systems Biology
Environmental Science/Biomarkers
Subsurface Science
Chemistry (Radio, Actinide, Analytical) and Processing
Shielded Operations (Category 3)
Radiation Detection
Ultra-trace/Signature Detection
Information Analysis
Certification and Dosimetry.
The CRL projects will preserve these capabilities by constructing new facilities, renovating existing
facilities, installing new utility infrastructure and relocating staff and existing research equipment. A
federally funded line item project, the Physical Sciences Facility (PSF), will construct several new
buildings, collectively referred to as the Physical Sciences Facility (PSF-HRT), and perform life
extension modifications to the existing 325 Building. A developer will construct two privately financed
facilities, the Computational Sciences Facility (CSF) and the Biological Sciences Facility (BSF). Minor
renovations will be performed on the 318, 331 and 350 Buildings. This Project Execution Plan (PEP) will
focus exclusively on the PSF. The scope of the other CRL projects are described in the CRL project
Implementation Plan (PIP) (CRL-PLAN-PM-005) as a reference document to this PEP. The PIP
describes how each of the projects relates to the others and defines interface points. The CRL projects are
shown in Figure 1. The CRL Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) is shown in Figure 2. The PSF new
construction is shown in Figure 3.
1 of 46

PSF-325
318
350
331
PSF-HRT
BSF
CSF
Mission Critical Capabilities
PSF - HRT
Ultra-trace
Radiation Detection
Chemistry and Processing
PSF - 325
Shielded Operations
Radiation Detection
Chemistry and Processing
Systems Biology
BSF
3rd Party
CSF
Building 318: GPP/Expense
Certif ication & Dosimetry
Building 331: GPP/Expense
Subsurf ace Science
Environmental Biomarkers
Building 350: IGPP
Figure 1.
Inf ormation Analytics
Support Services Shop
Facilities Included in the CRL Projects Scope of Work. The PSF new construction and
325 Building Life Extension efforts are captured as the PSF Line Item scope in this PEP.
2 of 46

Figure 2. CRL Work Breakdown Structure
Figure 3. PSF New Construction Site Plan
1.2 Purpose
This PEP defines the PSF project and describes planning, assumptions, constraints, roles, responsibilities,
authorities, management interactions, and interface management necessary to successfully execute the
PSF project. This PEP was prepared in accordance with the DOE Order 413.3A Program and Project
Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets. The Deputy Secretary has previously designated the
PSF project as a Major System Project because it is jointly funded by SC, NNSA and DHS. The DOE
Deputy Secretary is the Acquisition Executive (AE) for the PSF project. As part of Critical Decision-2
(CD-2) approval, delegation of AE authority to the Under Secretary for Science will be requested and the
PSF Line Item project will be designated a Non-MSA Project. This PEP is written with the assumption
that after CD-2, the AE for the PSF project will be the Under Secretary for Science.
3 of 46

1.3 Approval and Revisions

Approval of this PEP will occur as an element of CD-2, Approve Performance Baseline. The Deputy
Secretary is the AE and approval authority for this PEP. Approval of this PEP confirms the PSF Line
Item as a Non-MSA Project. Subsequent to the approval of the PEP and delegation of AE authority as
part of the CD-2 decision, changes to the PEP will be approved by the Under Secretary for Science.
4 of 46

2.0 Mission and Objectives

2.1 Mission Need
The following is an extract from the Justification of Mission Need document approved by the DOE
Deputy Secretary on September 23, 2004, as part of the CD-0 authorization.
The CRL projects mission is to: Relocate the necessary PNNL capabilities (people and equipment)
and infrastructure from the 300 Area to new replacement facilities by the end of FY 2011, while
minimizing interruptions to ongoing DOE and national mission-based research programs.
The capabilities being displaced in the 300 Area address critical national needs and support multiple DOE
strategic goals, including Science Strategic Goal 5: Provide world-class scientific research capacity
needed to: ensure the success of Department missions in national and energy security; advance the
frontiers of knowledge in physical sciences and areas of biological, medical, environmental and
computational sciences; or provide world-class research facilities for the Nations science enterprise.
CD-1 was approved in December 2005, and a revised implementation strategy was approved as CD-1R in
December 2006.
The PSF project described by this PEP will build or modernize the facilities below which will house the
PNNL research capabilities described in Section 1.1:
3410 Building Materials Science & Technology
3420 Building Radiation Detection
3425 Building Ultra-low Background/Deep Lab
3430 Building Ultra-trace
Central Utility Plant (CUP)
325 Building Shielded Operations.
The project has identified two bid alternates: 1) the Conference Center (3405 Building), and 2) the Large
Detector Laboratory (3440 Building). The Conference Center is intended to replace meeting room space
currently distributed through multiple 300 Area facilities and to provide a convenient resource that will be
shared by the three research capabilities validated for transfer from the 300 Area to the Horn Rapids
Triangle. If the Large Detector Laboratory bid alternate cannot be funded within the current Total Project
Cost of $224 million, the Office of Science will cover the increased cost to construct this facility,
estimated at $2M.
The need for retention of these capabilities was re-validated by the primary federal clients (i.e., SC,
NNSA, DHS, and DOEs Office of Environmental Management [EM]) in a workshop in 2005. Based on
that workshop, each of the capabilities listed above were deemed core by one or more federal clients,
indicating that the capability is necessary and essential for performing the clients work.
5 of 46

Among the applications of these capabilities are to provide advanced detection and analysis systems to
prevent nuclear proliferation and terrorism; radiochemistry and radiochemical processing for attribution
and mitigation of potential radiological dispersion devices and development of proliferation-resistant fuel
cycles; and materials science to increase nuclear plant life and to develop advanced materials for future
fission and fusion reactor applications and other advanced energy systems. More information on each
capability can be found in the Mission Needs Validation Report dated February 25, 2005.
2.2 Project Objectives

To accomplish the mission described above, the PSF project has established the following overall project
goals:
Construct new facilities and extend the useful life of the 325 Building for 20 years.
Minimize the impact to research operations and 300 Area Cleanup.
Ensure that environment, safety, health and security requirements are fully incorporated and properly
implemented into the projects design and construction.
Implement the PSF project within a total project cost (TPC) of $224 million and complete all PSF
project work scope by February 2011.
Plan and design the new facilities to maximize research efficiencies and optimize space usage
Achieve Leadership in Energy and Efficiency Design (LEED) certification.
Update the safety basis documentation to reflect the transition of safety basis approval authority from
EM to SC.
6 of 46

3.0 Project Description

The PSF project will construct new facilities on HRT, the PSF, extend the life of the 325 Building for
continued use, and conduct the necessary startup activities to accept the new construction and transition
the operation of 325 Building from EM to SC.
The new construction element of the PSF project will consist of approximately 190,000 square feet of
new research and office space located on the PNNL Site north of Horn Rapids Road (also referred to as
the Horn Rapids Triangle or HRT), which is a previously undeveloped portion of DOE-owned land. The
physical boundary of the HRT area is the land bordered on the west by Stevens Drive, on the south by
Horn Rapids Road and on the northeast by George Washington Way. The HRT comprises approximately
100 acres and is in the city of Richland. The PSF will consist of a collection of facilities (see Figure 3)
that will include wet laboratories, clean rooms and office space. The new facilities will house the
following capabilities: Materials Science and Technology, Radiation Detection, Ultratrace/Signature
Detection, and Non-Nuclear Chemistry and Processing.
In addition to the new construction scope, the PSF project will make necessary modifications to the
325 Building to allow it to operate safely for at least an additional 20 years. The 325 Building is located
on federally owned property in the Hanford Site 300 Area, and is bounded on the south by Cypress
Avenue, the east by California Street and the west by Wisconsin Street. The 325 Buildings site will be
isolated on the north perimeter by 6-foot boundary fence, which will be constructed approximately 60 feet
from the perimeter of the facility to isolate the facility and its occupants from other 300 Area cleanup
zones. Once the modifications are complete, the 325 Building will provide for chemistry research
(radiochemistry, actinide chemistry and analytical chemistry) and processing, as well as Category-2
shielded operations capability.
7 of 46

4.0 Organization and Responsibilities

As the lead agency for federal management of the PSF project, SC will provide a Program Manager at
DOE headquarters and a Federal Project Director (FPD) at the Pacific Northwest Site Office (PNSO) in
Richland, Washington. The Program Manager will serve as the primary interface point with the other
program sponsors NNSA and DHS. As the Management and Operating (M&O) Contractor for PNNL,
Battelle Memorial Institute will be the technical design authority for the new and modified federally
funded and owned facilities and will provide a Contractor Project Director (CPD) and sub-project
managers. PNNL will contract with architectural/engineering (A/E) and construction firms as required,
using existing PNNL management systems, for facility design, construction and modification activities.
The organizational structure of the project is depicted in Figure 4.
Figure 4. PSF Project Management Structure

In recognition of the multiple federal agencies and DOE program organizations involved in completing
the PSF project, the DOE Deputy Secretary has been designated as the AE for this project. The Under
Secretary for Science and the NNSA Administrator serve on the Energy Systems Acquisition Advisory
Board (ESAAB) to represent respective mission-critical capabilities and requirements. As an integral
partner in the project, the Under Secretary for DHS Science and Technology, or delegate, will be invited
to sit on the ESAAB. Following CD-2, AE authority will be delegated to the Under Secretary for
Science, or his designee, who will hold ESAAB Equivalent board meetings for subsequent CDs. NNSA
and DHS and EM representatives will be invited to attend these meetings.
8 of 46

4.1 Department of Energy

4.1.1
Deputy Secretary of Energy
Authority and responsibility for managing DOE programs and facilities resides with the Secretary of
Energy. Although the TPC of the PSF project is $224 million, because of the complexities of the project
including funding provided by various sources (SC, NNSA, and DHS), the Deputy Secretary is currently
designated as the AE for the project. Specific responsibilities of the AE for the PSF project include:
Chairs the ESAAB Equivalent Board
Approves CDs and project change controls as specified in Table 7.
Approves the PEP
Delegates approval authority for Level-2 baseline changes and future CDs.
4.1.2
Under Secretary for Science
SC has been delegated responsibility for comprehensive, long-range, basic energy-related research,
including state-of-the-art research facilities crucial to achieving goals described in the DOE Strategic
Plan.
The Under Secretary for Science, who is also the Director for SC provides overall program policy and
guidance, technical oversight, and budgets for implementing its assigned role. The DOE Deputy
Secretary is the Acquisition Executive for the PSF project, but has delegated overall management of the
Project to the Under Secretary for Science. Under this delegation, the Under Secretary for Science has
full responsibility for project planning and execution and for establishing broad policies and requirements
for achieving project goals.
4.1.3
Office of Biological and Environmental Research Program Manager
Program management responsibility for the CRL mission, including the PSF, has been assigned to the
CRL Program Manager within the DOE Office of Biological and Environmental Research (SC-23). In
addition to SC-23, the Program Manager is supported by other SC organizations in the planning,
budgeting and execution of this mission. With regard to this project, the Program Manager reports
directly to the Under Secretary for Science.
The Program Managers role and responsibilities are summarized as follows:
Communicates direction from the Acquisition Executive to the project
Oversees development of project definition, scope and budget
Defines programmatic mission requirements and objectives
Establishes programmatic requirements for nuclear safety and recommends operational readiness to
the SC nuclear safety authorization authority
Prepares, defends and provides project budget with support from the field and SC headquarters
organizations
Reviews and provides recommendations to the Acquisition Executive on Level-0 and Level-1
baseline changes
9 of 46

Functions as the primary point-of-contact at DOE headquarters for project matters to all parties
external to the project team and SC
Develops project performance measures, and monitors and evaluates project performance throughout
the life cycle of the project
Organizes reviews as necessary
Ensures that environment, safety and health (ES&H) requirements are implemented by the project
Coordinates with other SC offices, project sponsors and the DOE Office of Engineering and
Construction Management as needed to execute the project
Controls changes to project baselines in accordance with the PSF PEP.
4.1.4
Pacific Northwest Site Office Federal Project Director
The PNSO reports to SC and administers the M&O contract with Battelle Memorial Institute, which
includes day-to-day oversight of PNNL. In carrying out its oversight responsibilities, PNSO obtains
matrix support in various technical disciplines from the SC Integrated Support Centers. In addition to the
site office, the DOE Richland Operations Office (DOE-RL) has assigned a senior executive to coordinate
and resolve conflicted activities of the CRL mission that cross DOE organizational boundaries with EM
and RL.
The execution of the PSF project is the responsibility of the FPD. The PNSO Manager will ensure that
the FPD has priority access to PNSO resources and, when necessary, resources at the SC Integrated
Support Center, for that purpose. The FPDs responsibilities and authorities include the following:
Provides day-to-day oversight of the project and direction to ensure timely execution
Monitors, reviews, evaluates and reports on the performance of the project against established
technical, cost, and schedule performance baselines
Ensures ES&H is integrated into the project
Leads the Integrated Project Team (IPT)
Controls changes to project baselines in accordance with the PEP
Participates in Quarterly Project Reviews, ESAAB Equivalent Board meetings, and project reviews
conducted by the PSF project and DOE headquarters
Maintains project data in the DOE Project Assessment and Reporting System (PARS)
Issues Project Directive Authorizations for disbursement of funds and work authorizations
Prepares project documents
Coordinates matrix support from the SC Integrated Support Centers
Prepares and submits budget and funding documents to the Office of Biological and Environmental
Research Program Manager (e.g., Congressional Project Data Sheet and Exhibit 300).
10 of 46

4.2 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

4.2.1
PNNL Director
The PNNL Director is responsible for managing all activities at the PNNL site, including ensuring that all
laboratory programs meet the requirements of DOE Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830 between Battelle
Memorial Institute and DOE. Having delegated the authority to manage and execute the PSF project to
the CPD, the PNNL Director will ensure that the CPD has priority access to PNNLs resources to achieve
project goals. Key PNNL project staff and their roles and responsibilities are depicted in Figure 5.
Figure 5. Key Project Staff Roles and Responsibilities
4.2.2
The CPD has overall implementation responsibility for the full scope of project activities, which include
the PSF Line Item. In this role, the CPD is a member of the PNNL Directors Office and reports directly
to the PNNL Director. The CPD is responsible for the project staff selection at PNNL and at other
institutions collaborating in the project. Specific responsibilities of the CPD include:
Manages day-to-day execution of the project at PNNL and any other collaborating institutions
Establishes technical and administrative controls to ensure project is executed within approved cost,
schedule and technical scope
Ensures that project activities are conducted in a safe and environmentally sound manner
Ensures ES&H responsibilities and requirements are integrated into the project
Directs overall project planning
11 of 46

Ensures integration of the existing 300 Area research and development programs with the design,
fabrication, installation, construction and commissioning of the project
Represents the project in interactions with DOE; participates in management meetings with DOE and
communicates project status and issues
Chairs the Change Control Board (CCB)
Approves Level-3 change control proposals; prepares and provides recommendations to the FPD for
Levels-0, -1 and -2 change control proposals
Identifies and manages project risks.
The CPD is responsible for implementing the PSF project baseline. The CPD will report directly to the
FPD and will serve as the technical and contracting integrator on the PSF project. The CPD has
established a project organization to accomplish the PSF project. The project team includes staff who
report directly to the CPD and matrix staff. For the purposes of accomplishing PSF project activities,
both direct and matrix members of the team provide management and support services to the project and
take project direction from the CPD director.
PNNL will provide project management, integration, contracting, procurement services, technical and
engineering support, and other services as needed for the project. The PNNL technical team also is
responsible for oversight of the design, construction, facility operational component procurement,
equipment installation and testing and startup. In carrying out these responsibilities, PNNL will
Perform technical reviews of the deliverables
Integrate future facility operational components into existing PNNL facility management systems
Implement an Earned Value Management System (EVMS) to track performance against an approved
Performance Measurement Baseline (PMB)
Develop an annual work plan for each sub-project
Comply with the requirements of the PNNL Performance Evaluation and Management Plan as
conveyed via contract
Be responsible for implementing the facility capability replacement, including design, permitting,
material and equipment procurement, infrastructure development, facility construction, equipment
installation and component testing and startup
Be responsible for overall project management and integration, technical and engineering support,
and other services as needed.
Contractor Deputy Project Director
The Contractor Deputy Project Director provides senior technical oversight; assists in mitigating project
risks and has delegated approval authority from the CPD.
HRT New Construction Project Manager
The HRT New Construction Project Manager is responsible for the design, construction, startup and
turnover to operations of the new facilities in the HRT, including 3410 Building Materials Science &
12 of 46

Technology, 3420 Building Radiation Detection, 3425 Building Ultra-low Background/Deep Lab and
3430 Building Ultra-Trace.
325 Building Project Manager
The 325 Building Project Manager is responsible for the 325 Building life-extension upgrades for retained
radiological and nuclear facilities and provides project oversight of the design, construction and readiness
activities.
4.3 Project Interfaces

4.3.1
Internal/External Interfaces
The PSF project has internal and external interfaces that will be managed by the FPD, members of the
IPT and the CPD. External interfaces are with organizations or individuals outside the oversight
responsibility of PNSO and/or PNNL (i.e., NNSA, DHS, EM, State of Washington, City of Richland).
Internal interfaces are between PNSO and PNNL, the FPD and the CPD, members of the IPT and the
various organizations and contractors involved in the project. Interfaces also exist among the contractors
providing services to the PSF project and Hanford (i.e., A/E, commissioning, other project support
activities). Interface issues are anticipated to be technical, as well as associated with communications and
decision-making.
4.4 Integrated Project Team

The FPD will be supported by an IPT consisting of key project participants. Makeup of the IPT will vary
depending upon the functions and expertise necessary to manage the different phases of the project
life-cycle. A Portfolio Project Director has been assigned to the IPT by DOE-RL to assist the FPD by
providing guidance and facilitating effective integration between the PSF project and the 300 Area
cleanup contractor, Washington Closure Hanford. The IPT charter identifies the skill sets and disciplines
necessary to support the PSF project as of CD-2 (see Attachment B). This charter will be revised as
necessary by the FPD to reflect changes in requirements, needed skill mix and project life cycle.
13 of 46

5.0 Resource Requirements

5.1 Budget Authority
The Budget Authority (BA)/Budget Obligation (BO) by funding source and fiscal year are shown in
Table 1. This profile is based on incrementally funding major project engineering and construction
subcontracts at a rate sufficient to achieve PSF project schedule objectives.
Table 1. Total Project BA/BO Requirements
Budget
Authority/Budget
Outlay
Prior Years
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
Total Funding
a
b
OPCa
($million)
$5.8
$$1.5
$4.3
$2.2
$.011
$14.0
PEDb
($million)
$23.8
$4.8
$$$$$28.5
PSF
Construction
($million)
$2.0
$15.1
$58.8
$77.1
$19.3
$9.9
$181.5
BA (Funds)
($million)
$31.6
$19.9
$60.4
$81.5
$21.6
$9.0
$224.0
other project costs

project engineering and design
Table 2 shows the estimated contributions from the PSF funding agenciesSC, NNSA and DHS.
Table 2. Total Project Annual Funding Requirements
Physical Sciences Facility Funding Profile Guidance

(K$'s)
Prior
Years
PSF Line Item
NNSA
SC
DHS
PSF Project Profile
$18,470
$10,896
$2,250
$31,616
FY 2007
$7,920
$10,000
$2,000
$19,920
FY 2008
$0
$35,379
$25,000
$60,379
FY 2009
$37,919
$30,549
$13,000
$81,468
FY 2010
$3,625
$7,977
$10,000
$21,602
FY 2011
Total
$1,689 $69,623
$3,643 $98,444
$3,684 $55,934
$9,016 $224,000
Note: SC committed to funding mission critical requirements above $224 M (e.g., $2M Large Detector Laboratory)
without any additional costs to NNSA and DHS.
As a result of the conceptual design process to-date, it has become evident that significant cost savings
and research efficiency gains can be achieved if replacement facilities are constructed to maximize
capability synergies. Doing so, however, means that funding from multiple sponsors will need to be
aggregated and applied to the overall effort.
A Memorandum of Understanding agreeing to pursue these funding shares to support the project was
signed on November 7, 2006, by the principals from each agency (see Attachment A).
14 of 46

5.2 Work Breakdown Structure

The PSF project has been organized into a WBS that contains a complete definition of the projects scope
and forms the basis for planning, executing and controlling project activities. This WBS is graphically
depicted in Figure 6.
1.1 Physical Sciences Facility

1.1.01 Project
Integration & Support
1.1.02 HRT
Facilities
1.1.03 325 Bldg Life

Extension Projects
1.1.01.01 Project
Mgmt & Business
Systems Integration
1.1.02.01 HRT
Facilities Integration
1.1.03.01 325 Bldg

Integration
1.1.01.02
Environmental Safety
& Health
1.1.02.02
Engineering, Design
& Inspection
1.1.03.02 325 Bldg

Facility Life
Extension
1.1.01.03 Quality
Assurance
1.1.02.03 Safety
Basis
1.1.03.03 325 Bldg

Safety Basis
1.1.01.04 R&D
Liaison
1.1.02.04 Facility
Construction
1.1.03.04 325 Bldg

Operational
Readiness
1.1.02.05
Operational Startup
& Readiness
1.1.02.06 Site
Permitting
Figure 6. Level-3 PSF Project Work Breakdown Structure
5.3 Acquisition Strategy

The new construction scope of the PSF project will be acquired using fixed-price design and construction
contracts. The modifications of the 325 Building will be acquired using fixed price design and
construction contracts combined with self performance for specialized activities. Project execution will
be managed by DOE and PNNL. PNNL will directly contract with A/E and construction firms for
performance of the work. The subcontracted design and construction activities in support of the PSF
project will be based on the guiding principle of negotiating fixed-price, milestone-driven contracts with
the design and construction subcontractors. PNNL will perform the construction management function
and integration of the facilities with existing laboratory research and facility operations requirements, and
transition of staff and equipment. Building commissioning will be performed by the A/E.
The project will be designed and managed in accordance with the latest editions of relevant DOE orders
and guides, industry codes and standards, and will employ best practices in construction management.
15 of 46

Work Authorization
Work by project participants will be authorized using processes consistent with DOE O 412.1,
Work Authorization System. Funding will be distributed to PNNL using the Financial Plan
Authorization process. Critical Decision approval authority is reflected in Table 3.
Table 3. Critical Decision Approval Authority
Critical Decision Milestone
Approval Authority
CD-0, Approve Mission Need

CD-1, Approve Alternative Selection and Cost Range
CD-2, Approve PSF performance baseline
CD-3a, Approve completion of design; long lead procurements and start of construction for
site work, foundation and structural steel for the HRT Facilities
CD-3b, Approve balance of facility construction for the HRT facilities and the life-extension
upgrades for the 325 Building
CD-4a, Completion of readiness activities for the first Horn Rapids Triangle facility
(Ultra-Trace) and subsequent declaration of readiness to operate. Approval authorizes the
start of operations of the first HRT facility (3430 Ultra-Trace).
CD-4b Completion of readiness activities and subsequent declaration of readiness of the last
HRT facility (3420-Radiation Detection) and 325 Building. Completion marks the transition
to operations of the final HRT facility and the start of PSF project closeout activities.
Deputy Secretary
Deputy Secretary
Deputy Secretary
Under Secretary for
Science
Under Secretary for
Science
Under Secretary for
Science
Under Secretary for
Science
5.4 Life Cycle Cost

A preliminary estimate for operations and maintenance costs of the facilities provided by the PSF project,
including utilities, facility operations and maintenance but excluding programmatic research costs, is
about $9.7 million per year in FY 2006 dollars. It is expected that the PSF new construction will have a
useful operating life of about 40 years and that 325 Building will continue to operate for about 20 years.
At the end of its useful operational life the 325 Building will be designated as excess and turned over to
EM for D&D actions. A life cycle cost analysis was completed in support of CD-1R and estimated that
the cost to demolish the PSF as well as the retained facilities in the 300 Area would be approximately
$170 million.
5.5 Contingency Management

The PSF project has identified cost, schedule, and scope contingency based on risks and uncertainties.
To the extent possible, mitigation strategies for identified risks were incorporated into the baseline budget
and schedule to minimize project impacts. Contingency estimates are identified outside the performance
measurement baseline, and are based on likelihood and severity of the risk and uncertainty. Contingency
was derived against individual work elements using appropriate contingency development techniques.
All contingency for the project will be held under the control of the Program Manager, FPD and CPD as
governed by the Baseline Change Control process defined in Section 7.2.
16 of 46

6.0 Project Baselines

The PSF technical baseline forms the basis for the other two baseline components: the cost and schedule
estimates. The PSF technical baseline has been sufficiently developed through the preliminary design
package to support confidence in the corresponding cost and schedule baselines. The technical baseline
defines the physical extent of the project, including end points, and is well defined within the described
activities and assumptions.
6.1 Technical Scope

The technical scope of the PSF project is to provide adequate space for the retention of the vital research
capabilities listed in Section 2.1 by constructing new facilities on the HRT and extending the useful life of
325 Building for 20 years.
6.1.1
Project Integration and Support (WBS Element 1.1.01)
Physical Boundaries. The physical boundaries of this WBS element are consistent with Battelle
management, regulatory and administrative services provided in support of developing the HRT site and
within the physical perimeters of the 325 Building site within the 300 Area.
Completion. This WBS element will be considered complete when the Acquisition Executive or his
designee approves CD-4b, PSF Project Closeout.
Work Scope Description. This WBS element will deliver resources for general management, project
integration and support services for the retention and relocation of PNNL capabilities in accordance with
the PSF project objectives. This includes establishing and maintaining effective working relationships
between the FPD, the IPT and the PNNL Director. The resources within this task will direct and support
efforts required to successfully support design, modifications, commissioning, startup and occupancy of
the PNNL facilities and associated infrastructure related to WBS elements 1.1.02, HRT Facilities, and
1.1.03, 325 Building Life Extension Improvements. This scope includes identifying and assessing all
vulnerabilities and ensuring managerial action is taken to prevent adverse consequences to the PSF
project.
6.1.2
HRT Facilities (WBS Element 1.1.02)
Physical Boundaries. The PSF new construction includes all new facilities and supporting infrastructure
on the HRT.
Completion. This WBS element will be considered complete when all facilities are complete, the
transition to operation requirements in PEP Section 11.0 have been met, and the AE or his designee
approves CD-4b, Project Closeout.
Work Scope Description. This WBS element will provide the necessary infrastructure and facilities to
relocate the following capabilities from the 300 Area to the HRT: materials science and technology,
radiation detection, ultra-trace, and chemistry and processing (non-nuclear). Design, construction,
commissioning, readiness assessment, and turnover to operations of the following key project deliverables
are included. The following are included in this WBS element:
17 of 46

3410 Building Materials Science and Technology

3420 Building Radiation Detection
3425 Building Ultra-Low Background/Deep Laboratory
3430 Building Ultra-Trace Analysis
Central Utility Plant (contained in 3410 Building)
Facility engineering, design, inspection and commissioning will be performed by a subcontracted A/E.
6.1.3
325 Building Life Extension Improvements (WBS Element 1.1.03)
Physical Boundaries. The 325 Building life extension includes all modifications to the existing facility
in the 300 Area.
Completion. This WBS element will be complete when the approval authority has transitioned from EM
to SC and all physical verifications are complete and operationally accepted.
Work Scope Description. This WBS element will perform necessary modifications and upgrades to
extend the useful life of the existing 325 Building (also known as the Radiochemical Processing
Laboratory [RPL]) for a minimum of 20 years. This work includes definitive design, engineering and
inspection services, and authorization basis updates required to modify the facility and extend the
facilitys operating life. This includes preparation of drawings, specifications and acceptance test
procedures to support site work, building alterations and support equipment, furnishings, and
authorization or regulatory document revisions. Facility engineering, design and inspection, safety basis
technical document preparation and natural phenomena analysis will be performed by a subcontracted
A/E. PNNL will provide nuclear safety expertise, processes and procedures as well as design,
construction and construction management services required to modify the 325 Building.
To support increased heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) capacity requirements,
modernization of the 325 Building will include removal of fume hoods, design, fabrication and
installation of new hot cells and glove boxes. In addition, roof repairs, replacement of personnel
contamination monitoring systems and various HVAC components , design and construction of new
second-floor access and structural seismic upgrades recommended by the 10-year update of the natural
phenomena hazards assessment will be performed.
6.2 Cost
The TPC is $224 million. The PSF project cost estimate by WBS is shown in Figure 7.
Project Cost Estimate by Client Reporting Level
WBS
Description
1.1.1
1.1.2
1.1.3
(multiple)
Project Integration and Support

PSF HRT Facilities Design, Construction and Startup
Building 325 Life Extension
Other Project Cost (OPC)
Total Base Budget
Contingency
Total Project Cost
Contingency Percent of To Go Budget (APR-07)
Budget ($M)
CD-2 Baseline
16.7
123.9
32.9
11.8
185.3
38.7
224.0
24%
Figure 7. PSF Project Cost Estimate by Work Breakdown Structure
18 of 46

6.3 Schedule
The master schedule is consistent with the WBS and is coordinated with interfacing projects to ensure
PNNL transition from the 300 Area supports cleanup objectives and results in minimal impact to research
operations. The integrated master schedule is developed and maintained by PNNL in the Primavera P3
Cost and Scheduling software. The Projects critical path runs through the HRT new construction.
The PSF project Level 1 milestones are shown in Table 4, and Level 2 milestones are shown in Table 5.
Table 4. PSF Project Level 1 Milestones
Level and
Number
Milestone Description
1-1
CD-0 Approve Mission Need
Revalidated
1-2
CD-1 Approve Preliminary Baseline Range
Revised
1-3
CD-2 Approve Performance Baseline
1-4
CD-3a Approve Start of Construction site work, foundation and structural steel
for the HRT Facilities
1-5
CD-3b Approve Start of Construction Balance of construction
1-5
CD-4a Completion of readiness activities for the first Horn Rapids Triangle facility
(Ultra-Trace) and subsequent declaration of readiness to operate. Approval
authorizes the start of operations of the first HRT facility (3430 Ultra-Trace).
1-6
CD-4b Completion of readiness activities and subsequent declaration of readiness
of the last HRT facility (3420-Radiation Detection) and 325 Building. Completion
marks the transition to operations of the final HRT facility and the start of PSF
project closeout activities.
Completion Date
September 2004 (A)
February 2005 (A)
December 2005 (A)
December 2006 (A)
June 2007
July 2007
February 2008
January 2010
February 2011
Table 5. PSF Project Level 2 Milestones

WBS Element
1.1.02.04
1.1.02.02
1.1.02.04
1.1.01.01
1.1.02.04
1.1.02.04
1.1.03.03
1.1.03.02
*1.1.03.02
1.1.02.04
1.1.02.05
1.1.02.04
1.1.02.04
*1.1.02.04
1.1.02.04
1.1.02.04
1.1.02.05
1.1.02.05
*1.1.02.05
Activity
Number
SM1007
SM1080
SM1131
SM1012
SM1058
SM1024
SM1107
SM1239
SM1149
SM1031
SM1133
SM1032
SM1034
SM1094
SM1030
SM1035
SM1074
SM1105
SM1195
Description
Award Early Sitework Contract PSF
Complete Final Design
Award Steel Contract
Submit CD-3B Package
Award Balance of Construction Contract
Complete Structural Steel Contract
Submit 325 Building Modernized DSA for DOE Approval
325 Bldg Infrastructure Upgrade Complete
325 Bldg Construction Complete
3420-Ultra-trace Facility Construction Complete
Authorization to Operate 3420-Ultra-trace
3410-MS&T Facility Construction Complete
3420-Rad Detection Facility Construction Complete
3425- Ultra-low Background/Deep Lab Construction Complete
Central Utility Plant Facility Construction Complete
PSF Facility Construction Complete
Authorization to Operate 3410-MS&T
Authorization to Operate 3420-Rad Detection
Authorization to Operate 3425 Ultra-low Background/Deep Lab
*Note Pending approval of baseline change request.
19 of 46
Completion
Date
18-Jul-07
26-Sep-07
8-Nov-07
9-Jan-08
5-May-08
7-Nov-08
20-Mar-09
6-Mar-09
9-Mar-10
15-Jan-10
26-Apr-10
17-May-10
22-Jun-10
22-Jun-10
29-Jun-10
21-Jul-10
2-Aug-10
21-Sep-10
21-Sep-10

7.0 Project Management Control and Reporting

7.1
Baseline Change Control Management
The PSF project has implemented a project management control system. This system provides the
essential earned value information needed for management control of the project and maintains the
database for progress reporting. The system integrates the cost and schedule baselines and provides the
tools to monitor project performance. The data from the control system is the basis for information
entered into PARS.
The PSF project controls changes in functional and physical requirements and evaluates the impact of
changes on cost and schedule through a baseline change control process. The process promotes orderly
evolution from the baseline design, and ensures that the effect of changes on cost, schedule and technical
scope performance are properly evaluated and documented by project management. A Baseline Change
Proposal (BCP) must be initiated when there will be an impact on any of the cost, schedule or scope
baselines. Thresholds for determining the BCP approval level during project execution, per
DOE O 413.3A, are delineated in Table 6.
The CPD has established a change control process in accordance with EVMS criteria to address changes
at Level 3 and below. A CCB has been established for Level 2 and above changes requiring DOE
approval. The board includes the Chairman (the CPD), a change control manager and board members as
defined by the Change Board Charter. At a minimum, the CCB consists of the CPD, the FPD and the SC
Program Manager. The board members review the technical, cost and schedule impacts of changes and
advise the Chairman. All BCP actions are maintained in a change control log.
Congressional notification is required when a project change results in a 25 percent increase in the total
estimated cost (TEC). Project changes caused by Congressional action, such as a funding shortfall or the
addition of new requirements, will be called directed changes. Directed changes will follow the change
control process and will be approved by the appropriate authority.
Several key milestones have been selected as performance measurement control points by the FPD.
These milestones are listed in Table 5, are defined to be Level 2 milestones, and will be controlled as
described in Table 6.
20 of 46
Managing Project Baseline Changes

The company I work for is made up of many functional groups located around the world. The
information technology group is responsible for providing a reliable and robust computer environment
through which the company can run its global operations. The information technology group recently
initiated a project to upgrade its software distribution system to a more current version. The current
system is outdated and no longer supported by the manufacturer. The upgrade would allow them to
regain technical support as well as leverage information within a recently deployed Active Directory,
allowing for increased automation during software deployments.
Upon approval of the initial project charter, the project team developed a detailed project scope
statement, work breakdown structure, project schedule, and time-phased cost estimates (project
budget). The documents were combined into a project management plan, presented to the project
sponsors, approved, and saved as a project baseline. The project baseline is the approved project
management plan plus approved changes (Schwalbe, 2006, p. Glossary-1).. Now that the project team
had an approved project plan, they could move forward with executing the project tasks. However,
during project execution, reality does not always align nicely with the project plan, and project
managers must make changes to the plan in order to achieve project success. Every project is
constrained in different ways by its scope, time [schedule], and cost goals (Schwalbe, 2006, p. 7). In
order to effectively manage projects, project managers must understand how changes to the triple
constraints impact the project and implement strategies to manage baseline changes.
Scope Baseline
The scope baseline is the approved detailed project scope statement and its associated WBS (PMBOK,
2004). The detailed project scope statement describes the projects deliverables and the work
required to create those deliverables (PMBOK, 2004, chap. 5.2.3.1). Using the scope statement, the
project team creates a list of the deliverables they will need to produce in order to achieve the project
objectives. The deliverables are broken down into sub-deliverables, and eventually into work packages
that the team will execute. Without a scope statement, a project team can not determine the work
that is to be done.
At a high-level, included in the software distribution upgrade project scope is the training, design,
testing, and deployment of upgrades to all existing system servers and client software in the United
States. The scope also includes deployment to existing servers at international locations. However,
until a detailed technical analysis of the international location servers is conducted, the project team
will not know if the servers are sufficient to host the system deployment software.
Changes to the project scope, like the need to upgrade or replace servers, could impact the project
baseline. If servers are identified for upgrade or replacement, the project team will need to add
additional tasks to the work breakdown structure. The addition of tasks could affect the project
schedule by pushing out the completion date. The cost of adding new servers might increase the
funding needed for project completion, impacting the cost baseline.
Schedule Baseline
A project schedule is created by sequencing the tasks within a work breakdown structure to identify
the logical relationships between tasks. Once the relationships are defined, resources are assigned and
durations are determined for each task to create a schedule network analysis. A schedule baseline is a
specific version of the project schedule developed from the schedule network analysis. It is accepted
and approved by the project management team as the schedule baseline with baseline start dates and
baseline finish dates (Schwalbe, 2006, p. 231).
Changes to the project schedule can impact the project baseline. When developing the project
schedule for the software distribution system upgrade project, the team made estimates of resources
and task durations based on their current knowledge. Any tasks that take longer than expected could
affect the length of the project, especially if the tasks are on the critical path of the project.
Variances on the critical path have the potential for negatively impacting the project completion
date (Cleland & Ireland, 2004, p. 328). In some projects, the completion date is not a concern.
However, in a project where the completion date is fixed, project managers will need to take actions
to ensure the project completes by the agreed target date. To accomplish this, additional resources
may need to be added to tasks in order to reduce task duration; additional resources can result in
increased cost, which will impact the cost baseline. If cost for a project is fixed, the team might need
to request a reduction in the number of deliverables for the project, affecting the scope baseline.
Cost Baseline
The cost baseline is a time-phased budget that is used as a basis against which to measure, monitor,
and control overall cost performance on the project. (PMBOK, 2004, chap. 7.2.3.1). Many factors can
affect the cost performance of a project. During the planning phase, the project team will create cost
estimates for each task. However, the true costs of certain tasks may not be known. In addition,
depending on the timeframe for task execution, changes to costs could occur, resulting in a variance
from the original estimates. For example, during the planning for the software distribution system
upgrade project, the team planned to send four people to a week-long training event. The team
included travel expenses in the estimate using current flight, hotel, and car rental information.
However, based on the project schedule, the training is not scheduled to occur for three months.
Increases in flight or hotel costs could directly impact the overall cost of the project.
If cost is fixed for the project, the team will need to determine how to reduce costs in other areas of
the project. One way is to remove other cost-related tasks; however, this approach could affect the
project deliverables, thereby requiring a change in the scope baseline. Another approach could be to
use less expensive resources to complete some of the tasks. However, resources are usually less
expensive because they have less experience or skill. As a result, tasks might take longer than
originally planned, affecting the schedule baseline.
Managing Baseline Changes
In order to ensure changes to the project scope, schedule, and cost baselines are properly considered,
project teams should use a formal change control process. A change control process involves
identifying, evaluating, and managing changes throughout the project life cycle (Schwalbe, 2006, p.
151). Unmanaged changes can quickly cause a project to spiral out of control. The information
technology group at my company uses a formal process for submitting and obtaining approval for
changes to project scope. The change request must include a description of the change, the reason for
the change, and the impact on project schedule and cost baselines. The change request is reviewed by
the project sponsors and key stakeholders. Once approved, the project schedule and costs are updated
and a new project baseline is established. However, the changes to project schedule or costs at my
company do not always follow the same structured process.
As part of weekly project update reports, project managers at my company include a brief summary of
the variance for project schedule and cost. Included in the summary is an action plan to return the
variance to the project baseline. If the project manager determine that a return to baseline is unlikely,
an update on projected schedule and costs is included. As long as project schedule is not constrained
by a locked-in completion date, schedule is allowed to slide. Likewise, as long as costs do not exceed
10% of the approved cost baseline, project managers to not need to seek additional approvals.
QualityThe Fourth Constraint
As discussed, scope, schedule, and cost are the basic elements that interact to form the project
baseline. However, a forth element, quality, is also a key element in projects. Some people refer to
the quadruple constraint of project management, including quality along with scope, schedule, and
cost (Schwalbe, 2006, p. 8). Quality in projects can be simply defined as meeting customers
requirements (Cleland & Ireland, 2004, p. 293). While evaluating decisions to change scope, schedule
and cost, project managers must be careful to consider the impacts to the quality of project
deliverables. By carefully balancing these elements and implementing strategies to manage baseline
changes, project managers will improve their changes of meeting customer needs, on time and within
budget.

Table 6. Summary Baseline Change Control Thresholds

Secretarial
Acquisition
Executive (SAE)
Scope
Schedule
Cost
Approval
authority only
required in case
of Deviation as
Defined below
for the SAE.
Under Secretary for

Science
A change in scope that
1) does not affect the
ability to satisfy the
mission need; 2) still meet
a Key Performance
Parameter; or 3) maintains
conformance with the
current approved PEP
baseline, which must be
reflected in the Project
Data Sheet.
Three to six months
increase (cumulative) in a
Level 1, milestone date
(see Table 4), or any
change to project
completion date.
Any increase in TPC and/or

TEC
DOE FPD with Program

Manager Concurrence
Any change affecting the
approved scope as defined
in Section 6.1 of this PEP,
but does not affect the
mission need.
PNNL Contractor
Project Director
Any change in scope that
does not alter the overall
project scope as defined
in Section 6.1 of this PEP.
Any change to a Level 1

milestone date (see
Table 4), (except for CD4b, project completion
date) or a change to a
Level 2 milestone date
(see Table 5), of more
than one month or less
than six months.
Any increase below
PNSO Reporting Level
(see Figure 7). Greater
than $500 K use of
contingency without an
increase to TPC or TEC.
Any change to a Level 2

milestone (see Table 5) of
less than one month,
unless the change
negatively impacts a
Level 1 milestone (see
Table 4).
Any increase to a Control
Account Level or $500
K use of contingency
(PNNL Management
Reserve) without an
increase to TPC or TEC.
Performance Baseline Deviations: Project changes which DO modify the Performance Baseline.
Performance Baseline Change Authority1
Secretarial Acquisition Executive
A change in scope that affects the ability to satisfy the
mission need, an inability to meet a Key Performance
Parameter, or nonconformance with the current approved
Project Execution Plan, which must be reflected in the
Project Data Sheet.
A delay of 6 months or greater (cumulative) from the
original project completion date.
An increase in excess of the lesser of $25M or 25%
(cumulative) of the original CD-2 cost baseline.
Under Secretary
(Program Secretarial Officer, if delegated)
A change in scope that 1) does not affects the ability to
satisfy the mission need; 2) still meet a Key
Performance Parameter; or 3) maintains conformance
with the current approved Project Execution Plan
baseline, which must be reflected in the Project Data
Sheet.
A delay of less than 6 months cumulative from the
original project completion date, CD-4b.
An increase that is less than $25M or 25%
(cumulative) of the original CD-2 cost baseline.
7.2 Project Reporting

Project reviews and reporting will be consistent with DOE Order 413.3A and applicable DOE
management reporting procedures. PNNL, as the project integrator, will submit formal monthly reports
to the FPD no later than the 15th day of each month and at a level of detail associated with the third level
of the PSF WBS. The FPD will enter project status information into PARS each month at a minimum
and more frequently if circumstances require.
21 of 46

Cost and schedule variance analysis will be performed for variances at the DOE reporting level (one level
higher than the control account) against any element of the project baseline that exceeds the following
variance thresholds:
Current Period: 15% and $50,000
Cumulative: 10% and $100,000
7.3 Project Meetings and Reviews

7.3.1
Quarterly Progress Reviews
A formal review of the project will be conducted quarterly following approval of CD-0 or as requested by
the AE.. This activity is consistent with the performance review requirement in DOE O 413.3A. This
review will involve a detailed evaluation of each replacement facility and 325 Building to determine the
cost of work completed, milestones accomplished, cost of work yet to be performed, determination of an
appropriate contingency factor for the remaining work, and a reassessment of all work schedules to
reaffirm the specific facility completion date.
Quarterly reviews are held to communicate accomplishments and issues to the FPD, the IPT and
stakeholders as appropriate to maintain project momentum. These reviews can be held in
Washington, D.C., or in Richland, Washington, depending on logistical preferences. Maximum use of
teleconferencing, when practical, will be pursued to control travel costs.
As part of the quarterly review, the team will verify that all known budget and schedule changes approved
since the last review have been incorporated in the approved baseline. A check also will be made to
assure that the remaining construction work can be completed within the approved construction
schedules.
Emphasis will be placed on identifying PSF project interface questions and concerns to allow for timely
SC, NNSA, DHS, EM and PNNL management involvement in resolving issues to maintain project scope,
schedule and budget objectives.
7.3.2
Independent Reviews
Peer and independent reviews are an important project management tool and serve to verify the PSF
project's mission, organization, development, processes, baseline and progress. Reviews may be initiated
internally by the project team or may be independently initiated and conducted by an external
organization. Reviews may be scheduled or unscheduled to meet a specific objective or need, such as a
budget validation or a CD request.
The following reviews have been performed or are expected for the PSF project:
Mission NeedIndependent Project Review (IPR). This was a limited review of the project
following CD-0. It refined and validated the mission need. This review was conducted in
November 2004, and is documented in the Mission Need Validation Report.
PMB IPR. This was a review of the performance measurement baseline by an independent team led
by the Office of Project Assessment (SC-1.3). The purpose of the reviews are to evaluate the
projects readiness to proceed.
22 of 46

PMB External Independent Review (EIR). This is a detailed review of the entire project, including
an Independent Cost Review, prior to CD-2. The EIR verifies the proposed technical scope, schedule
and cost baselines and will assess the overall status of the project management and control system.
Executability IPR. This is a general review of the project prior to each of the phased CD-3 decisions
that may range from an abridged review of specific areas within a project to a comprehensive review
of the entire project. As a minimum, it will verify the readiness of the project to proceed into
construction. This review is expected to be completed prior to the formal CD-3 review meeting and
again, as required, as project conditions warrant.
7.3.3
Preliminary and Detailed Design Reviews
The design effort is subdivided into preliminary and detailed engineering. Information produced at the
completion of a design phase is verified by an independent review. The independent review validates and
certifies that the design is in accordance with all applicable local, regional and national engineering codes
and regulations and complies with the project specifications. Guidelines for independent verification can
be found in DOE-STD-1036-93, Guide to Good Practices for Independent Verification. PNNL will
coordinate and manage the review process for all engineering drawings and documents in each of the
design phases. Rework of the design documents will be carried out until requirements are met.
To attain uniformity in preparing designs and design implementation where such uniformity will
contribute to safety, quality and economy, PNNL will use nationally recognized codes and standards. The
PNNL lead design engineer will identify and apply the appropriate codes, standards and requirements
needed to satisfactorily prepare the design.
The technical objectives for this project will also be implemented by conforming to PNNL design
standards. These standards will provide the basis for the design and implementation of this project.
Design and constructability reviews will be conducted to verify the design meets the technical and
functional requirements. Constructability reviews will include both internal and external reviewers to
ensure the design can be efficiently implemented.
Design reviews will be conducted to ensure that current codes and standards are incorporated into
specifications, drawings and other related reports (e.g., the energy conservation report) that pertain to the
facility functional requirements. The purpose of the review is to verify that the design complies with
customer and agency requirements and accepted standards. As the owner of the design contract, PNNL
will perform design reviews throughout the development of the design. The PNNL design subcontractor
for A/E contracted work or the PNNL Lead Designer for self-performed work will present and defend the
design during the review. The formal review will include:
Assessing technical adequacy and conformance with agency and customer requirements, codes,
standards and other criteria such as budgetary constraints
Identifying consistent problems and errors as lessons learned to pass on to future projects
Managing reviewer participation and providing a process for conflict resolution.
23 of 46

PNNL will coordinate the review by providing the design documents to qualified participants in the fields
of ES&H; all applicable disciplines of engineering, architecture, controls, communications, security,
maintenance, fire protection, energy conservation and other areas as necessary and deemed appropriate.
The eventual programmatic user of the facility also will participate or be represented in the review to
ensure research requirements are achieved.
24 of 46

8.0 Risk Management

The DOE risk management concept is based on the principles that risk management must be analytical,
forward-looking, structured, informative and continuous. Effective risk management is an essential
element of the PSF project. The risk management process has been fully integrated with the baseline
planning process to incorporate mitigating actions as effectively as possible. Undesirable events have
been identified, analyzed in terms of the likelihood of occurrence and the resulting consequences and
mitigation strategies have been captured in a database.
The Risk Management Plan (RMP) (CRL-PLAN-PM-002) will be maintained to ensure that the project
incorporates appropriate, efficient and cost-effective measures to handle unacceptable project-related
risks that originate from the scope of the project. The RMP will assess project risk throughout the project
life cycle and will identify risks in a number of risk categories.
25 of 46

9.0 Environment, Safety and Health

The PSF project is committed to conducting its business in compliance with applicable regulations and
requirements, and to being responsive to the changing regulatory climate and practices. The topics below
describe the programs, procedures and documents that demonstrate compliance for the PSF project.
Before beginning work, the FPD and PNNL project team members ensure that the risks and hazards are
identified and controlled (with permits, procedures, training, etc.) as specified in approved work planning
documents.
Many phases of the PSF project will be performed through acquisition mechanisms, using the services of
contracted personnel. PNNL ES&H and acquisition staff will ensure that applicable ES&H requirements
are integrated into the contracting mechanisms to flow-down requirements to subcontracted personnel.
The PSF project team will ensure that ES&H resources are available for the different phases of the project
(e.g., design, construction and eventual transition into new facilities). The PNNL ES&H organization
will be responsible for providing staff (e.g., industrial safety and hygiene, training, radiological control,
environmental compliance representative, facility service representative, fire protection, facility safety,
waste management, etc.) to support PSF activities and to ensure those activities are conducted in
accordance with ES&H policies and procedures. This support includes not only direct PNNL activities,
but also oversight of contracted work.
9.1 Integrated Safety Management System

Work conducted under the PSF project shall be performed in accordance with PNNLs Integrated ES&H
(IES&H) Program (known by DOE as the Integrated Safety Management [ISM] Program) using the
ES&H policies and procedures provided in PNNLs Standards-Based Management System (SBMS) and
with an understanding of the PNNL Stopping and Restarting Work (Safety Rights and Responsibilities)
subject area. All staff shall promptly report accidents, injuries, ES&H deficiencies, emergencies and
off-normal events. Where necessary the approved PNNL ISM Program is supplemented by project
specific plans and procedures.
9.2 National Environmental Policy

The National Environmental Protection Act of 1969 (NEPA) internal scoping process for the PSF resulted
in a determination that an Environmental Assessment (EA) would be prepared for the project. The EA
addressed the effects of constructing and operating the PSF. This project is executed in accordance with
existing PNNL ES&H policies, systems and procedures to minimize impact to the environment. Through
the EA process, a determination was made that an Environmental Impact Statement was not required and
a Finding of No Significant Impact was approved by the PNSO in January 2007.
Processing of permit applications for submittal to regulatory agencies has been incorporated into the
project as part of permitting scope for the various phases of the project, and includes any fees required by
the agencies to process the application. Conditions and limitations imposed by agencies in the permit
approval are integrated into the PNNL management systems and facility and organizational procedures to
support readiness activities. Permitting activities will be closed out once integration of the conditions and
26 of 46

limitations occurs. At that point, the management systems and facility and organizational structures will
be responsible for costs associated with maintaining, modifying or updating permits.
9.3 Safety Assessment Documentation

9.3.1
Preliminary Hazards Analysis ReportHRT Facilities
The Hazard Analysis Report (HAR) satisfies the hazard analysis documentation requirements associated
with CD-2 of the DOE acquisition process defined in DOE O 413.3A, Program and Project Management
for the Acquisition of Capital Assets. The HAR also 1) meets the optional documentation requirements
for a radiological facility specified in Table 2-2 of PNL-MA-440, Safety Analysis, Section 2.0, Facility
Hazard Classification, and 2) supports the Radiological Facility determination of PSF-TECH-ESH-002,
Hazard Category Determination for the Physical Science Facility.
9.3.2
Documented Safety Analysis325 Building
325 Building is a Hazard Category-2 nuclear facility, currently operating with a EM-approved
Documented Safety Analysis (DSA). Activities supporting the 325 Building life extension include
evaluations of existing 325 Building structures, systems and components (SSC) and administrative
programs that are important to safe operation. These activities include reviews of recent applicable DOE
directives and guidance for new projects and long-term operational facilities and implementation of
Defense Nuclear Facility Safety Board recommendations. The PSF project approach is documented in
the Capability Replacement Laboratory Project Plan CRL-PLAN-ESH-001, Radiochemical Processing
Laboratory (RPL) Life Extension Safety Design Strategy. Development and approval of this strategy has
been coordinated with the DOE Safety Basis Review Team.
9.3.3
Emergency Preparedness Hazards Assessment
In assuring the appropriate level of emergency preparedness is provided, an understanding of the hazards
associated with each facility will occur by preparing a Hazard Survey and, if necessary, based on the
results of the Hazard Survey, an Emergency Preparedness Hazards Assessment (EPHA). The Hazard
Survey and, if required, the EPHA will be prepared in accordance with DOE O 151.1C, Comprehensive
Emergency Management System, and PNNL-MA-110, PNNL Emergency Management Plan. Building
Emergency Procedures, emergency preparedness drills and exercises and the level of required training for
staff will all be based on the results of the Hazard Survey and any EPHA.
27 of 46

10.0 Technical Analyses

10.1 Value Engineering
A formal facilitated value-engineering (VE) study was conducted on the PSF-HRT project preliminary
design in November 2006 (PSF Value Engineering Report November 14-16, 2006, CRL-TECH-PM-001).
In addition an operational VE was conducted to finalize the design approach for HVAC modifications in
the 325 Building. The operational VE resulted in the two recommendations described below, which are
included as Appendix E of the VE report.
Adopt the preferred engineering solution for providing HVAC exhaust system efficiency for the
325 Building (discussed Section 6).
Eliminate the need for the East Storage Yard enclosure.
These recommendations have been accepted for incorporation into the project baseline.
The VE process will be applied during the design phase to high-cost project activities. Systems
engineering trade-offs and functional analyses to identify alternative means of achieving the same
function at a lower life-cycle cost will be employed to maximize the return on investment.
10.2 System Engineering

System engineering principles will be employed by all users and stake holders in the development of the
project from conceptual design through construction and turnover to operations.
10.3 Configuration Management

Documents defining the configuration of the project baseline are maintained by PNNL through a formal
configuration control process. Configuration definition documents for the project are identified in the
CRL Configuration Management Plan.
10.4 Sustainable Building Design

DOE establishes energy efficiency standards for federal facilities and leads by example in adopting
energy efficient and sustainable building design practices. The PSF new construction will be designed
and constructed to be LEED certifiable in accordance with the guiding principles of Executive
Order 13423. PNNL, as both a developer and promoter of advanced environmental technologies, has set
several ambitious project goals for the design and development of the PSF. One of these goals is an
explicit desire that the facility be an embodiment of sustainable design and energy efficiency. During the
programming phase, ten major sustainable goals were established for the PSF project. A subsequent
reduction in project scope carried no associated reductions with respect to the applicability of the goals
originally established. The sustainable project goals include
Promoting a healthy and productive working environment (use of day-lighting, views to the exterior,
personal temperature, acoustical and lighting controls, fresh air and improved indoor air quality)
Reducing environmental impacts by reducing site disturbance and protecting existing habitat
Minimizing storm water runoff and increasing onsite infiltration
28 of 46

Reducing the use of potable water for landscape irrigation and maximizing potable water efficiency
Selecting building materials with the lowest reasonable life cycle cost and environmental impact
(e.g., greenhouse gas emissions, recycled content, water and air pollution)
Minimizing the waste generated from the construction process
Achieving LEED certification.
10.5 Reliability, Maintainability and Operability

The PSF design is reviewed for reliability, maintainability and operability by the PSF project team, which
includes research, engineering, construction management, operations, building management and
Environmental, Safety, Health and Quality staff. The primary objective of these reviews is to ensure the
development of systems that are constructible, reliable, safe, easy to operate and maintainable with
minimum resources. All modifications to the 325 Building are planned and authorized in accordance with
325 Building procedures (RPL Design Guide, Equipment Design, Procurement, Fabrication and
Functional Testing, June 1, 2005) for facility modification and account for reliability, maintainability and
operability objectives.
10.6 Quality Assurance

The CRL NQA-1 Quality Assurance Program Description (QAPD) implements DOE O 413.3A and the
PNNL Quality Assurance Program Description approved by PNSO as meeting 10 CFR 830 Subpart A
and DOE O 414.1C. The CRL NQA-1 QAPD applies to overall management of the PSF project and
through a stricter graded approach to activities affecting defense-in-depth SSCs for the construction of
new facilities in the HRT and for safety significant modifications performed in the 325 Building. PSF
project management, staff and contractors are responsible to implement the quality assurance program
requirements for the PSF project in accordance with the CRL Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) and
applicable contract documents.
29 of 46

11.0 Transition to Operations

11.1 Final Inspection and Acceptance
Consistent with DOE 413.3A, a startup test plan is required for the PSF that provides for a controlled,
graded and deliberate approach to achieving normal operations and ensures adequate transitions for
design, construction, commissioning, research capability relocation and validation of readiness. Elements
of this plan include
Acceptance testing of systems and components to performance and design criteria to demonstrate that
specifications and safety requirements have been met
Operational testing to validate the design, construction, hardware, programs and personnel are ready
to support safe operations
Operational readiness reviews to determine the facilities are ready for formal readiness assessment
and authorization to conduct work.
11.2 Transition to Operations

The collective process for PSF new construction startup and transition to operations will be managed
through the following plans:
The CRL Startup Plan, CRL-PLAN-SU-001, details the overarching processes that will ensure
successful startup for the PSF Project from design through operational readiness. The Startup Plan is
a CD-2 deliverable.
The Commissioning Plan, a CD-3a deliverable, will identify commissioning activities that
demonstrate, validate and document the performance of facility systems as designed, constructed and
installed. The systems are tested to performance criteria to ensure they are capable of being operated
and maintained. Commissioning includes verification of design, installation and acceptance testing.
System testing is accomplished using Functional Performance Tests to satisfy the acceptance criteria
in the basis of design and functional operational expectations.
Transition activities are not part of the PSF Line-Item scope. Detailed Capabilities Relocation Plans
will be provided by PNNL as an integration element. These plans will comprehensively define
activities that transition equipment and staff from the 300 Area into the PSF.
The PSF Operations Plan, developed during CD-3, will determine activities from construction,
commissioning and 300-Area transition, that need to be integrated and completed to meet SBMS
requirements for Facility Management and Facility Safety and to ensure successful facility readiness
reviews and operations. This includes validation that the design, construction, hardware, programs
and personnel are ready to support safe operation of the facility. This plan will ensure that
appropriate documentation exists to demonstrate that facility equipment and the facility are properly
built and will operate as designed, and that the as-built configuration and the initial operating
parameters of the facility are understood and documented. This plan will provide the approach for
development of facility-specific operating, maintenance and emergency preparedness procedures. It
will also address execution of specific job task analyses, training and qualification required for
facility power operators, crafts, and facility staff. The plan will define the level of pre-operational
30 of 46

assessment needed to confirm the adequacy of a facilitys overall conduct of operations, including
procedures, facility staff training and emergency preparedness.
The PSF Readiness Review Plan will define the startup authorization authority, processes for
preparation and conduct of readiness activities and reviews to confirm a satisfactory state of
operations for the PSF.
PNNLs Integrated Operations System (IOPS) structure will be deployed in PSF. PSF facility
workspaces will be identified and configured in IOPS following the standard process outlined in PNNLs
SBMS, Establishing and Maintaining IOPS in a Facility. Work practices and other facility-related
content will be developed to reflect the new facility characteristics with relocated staff being trained to the
new or upgraded Hazard Awareness Summaries, Work Practices and permits.
Operational readiness is achieved when facility, personnel, equipment and procedures are in a condition
that will allow routine operations to be started. The PNNL Management System description identifies the
basic set of facility and operational permits and processes needed for supporting routine operations. A
Facility Core Team will deploy work processes to manage the building operational boundary through
implementation of Facility Use Agreements using the Establishing a Facility Use Agreement subject area
in PNNLs SBMS. Emergency management functions, including Off-Normal Reporting coordination,
will be integrated into the existing PNNL process. Normal maintenance is established by a Facility Core
Team after beneficial occupancy has been accomplished.
The 325 Building is a Hazard Category-2 nuclear facility that currently operates under an EM-approved
DSA. The transition of authorization authority for the safety basis from EM to SC will occur as a
prerequisite for CD-4b. This is further discussed in Section 9.3 Safety Assessment Documentation. As
part of this transition, readiness review activities are anticipated. The level of readiness review will be
identified in the Readiness Review Plan described above. 325 Building transition of authorization basis
and operational acceptance is performed in accordance with CRL-INC-07-0011.
11.3 Lessons Learned

At completion of the PSF Project, a lessons-learned document will be prepared, distributed and placed
into the permanent project records. The PSF Project will establish a procedure for identifying and
documenting those items and situations that could have relevance to future DOE complex-wide capital
acquisition activities. As new lessons-learned reports are generated they will be distributed to the IPT by
the FPD. The final lessons-learned report should involve assembling the interim reports as a single
document.
11.4 Project Closeout

The purpose of the closeout effort is to ensure that DOE participation in the project is complete or, if
items remain to achieve completion, they are clearly and definitively identified. Closeout of DOE
participation in the PSF Project will occur when the sub-project acceptance testing is successfully
completed for all PSF facilities.
31 of 46

1. 4a = Approve Start of Operations

Completion of readiness activities for the first Horn Rapids Triangle facility (3430 Building Ultra-trace) and subsequent declaration of readiness to operate. Approval authorizes the start of
operations of the first HRT facility (3430 Building - Ultra-trace).
2. 4b = Close the PSF Line Item
Completion of readiness activities and subsequent declaration of readiness of the last HRT facility
(3420-Radiation Detection) and 325 Building. Completion marks the transition to operations of
the final HRT facility and the start of project closeout activities.
The test program to confirm the completion of equipment installation will validate that the identified
facility requirements in each sub-project are installed and that systems operate in accordance with
specifications. PNNL will develop specific testing plans and criteria for each system or component
important to showing completion of construction. The acceptance testing plan will include specific tests
and measurements that will be performed as well as the performance criteria that the structure, system or
component must achieve to be determined acceptable. PNNL will then perform the acceptance testing
and prepare an acceptance report.
A project closeout report will be prepared following approval of CD-4b. This closeout report will contain
information that accounts for and validates the expenditure of budget as authorized during the CD
process. A list of typical topics to be included in a closeout report follows:
Technical, scope, cost and schedule baseline accomplishments

Financial closeout, including a final cost report with details as required
Log of deliverables and milestones completed
Equipment installation acceptance test results
Photographic documentation
Baseline change control log
Final lessons-learned report
Other significant events, if any, that might affect the federal budget appropriation process.
32 of 46

Attachment A Memorandum From Acquisition

Executive on CD-1-R
33 of 46

34 of 46

35 of 46

36 of 46

37 of 46

Attachment B Integrated Project Team Charter

Pacific Northwest Site Office
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Physical Sciences Facility
Revision 4 3/15/07
Mission
The mission of the Department of Energy Office of Science (DOE-SC) Pacific Northwest Site Office
(PNSO) Integrated Protect Team (IPT) for the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) Physical
Sciences Facility (PSF) project is to plan and guide the PSF project to successful completion.
Project Objectives
Provide facilities to enable relocation of PNNL research capabilities from the majority of Hanford
300 Area facilities which they currently occupy. Design and construct new replacement facilities and
facility modifications to extend the life of 325 Building in the Hanford 300 Area. Do so in a manner that
Minimizes the impact to the PNNL programmatic research missions.
Minimizes delays to the demolition and cleanup of the Hanford 300 Area.
Provides the necessary infrastructure for PNNL staff to fulfill the research requirements necessary to
meet mission needs.
Maximizes research efficiencies/synergies across the entire PNNL research complex.
Optimizes space usage.
Optimizes the safety envelope of the replacement facilities with appropriate hazard categorization.
Expedites the DOE project management process in support of the projects critical-path schedule.
Completes the technical objectives in accordance with the cost and schedule baselines approved by
the Acquisition Executive.
Designs and constructs new facilities and modifies existing facilities within the fixed Total Project
Cost (TPC) of $224 million.
Project Organization
This project will be managed by the DOE-SC Federal Project Director (FPD) located at PNSO. The FPD
will be responsible and accountable for project execution to the HQ Program Manager. The FPD has
chartered an IPT which will assist the FPD as necessary to accomplish the project objectives.
Integrated Project Team Membership

The IPT is composed of experienced federal and contractor staff with the knowledge, skills and abilities
necessary to execute the project. The IPT members are those project participants that are primarily
dedicated to project execution tasks and work on the project on a daily basis, or as a minimum half of
their time. See the table below for membership by functional discipline.
38 of 46

IPT Members *
Discipline
Federal Project Director -PSF
Program Manager (Office of Science)
Portfolio Project Director (Richland Operations Office) EM
Federal Project Director - 325 Building Sub-Project
Facility Transition Manager
Safety Basis Review Team Lead/Nuclear Safety Analyst (Oak Ridge Operations)
Contractor Project Director (Battelle)
Member
Chad Henderson
Marcus Jones
Dave Brockman
Russell Warren
Julie Turner
Randy Persinger
James McClusky
*located at PNSO unless otherwise noted
Roles and Responsibilities

Federal Project Director
The FPD will lead the IPT and will be the primary point of contact for communication and coordination
with entities external to the IPT. The FPD is responsible, with the assistance of the IPT members, for the
following tasks:
Develop, staff, and issue the IPT charter.
Single point of contact between federal and contractor staff.
Plan, implement and complete the project using a systems engineering approach.
Tailor DOE project management requirements to the project.
Develop and implement the Acquisition Strategy and the Project Execution Plan.
Define project objectives and technical, schedule, and cost scopes.
Ensure timely completion and quality of required project documentation.
Assess contractor project performance versus contract requirements.
Proactively identify and resolve critical issues within Federal control.
Integrate and manage the timely delivery of government reviews, approvals, property, services, and
information.
Ensure the design, construction, environmental, safety, health, and quality efforts performed are in
accordance with the contract, public law, regulations, and Executive Orders
Evaluate and verify reported progress and report project performance in the Project Assessment and
Reporting System (PARS).
Approve changes in accordance with the PEP change control process.
Manage project contingency funds.
Program Manager
The SC Program Manager will be the primary point of contact for communication and coordination with
other federal agencies participating in the project, which include the National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA), the Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM), and the Department of
39 of 46

Homeland Security (DHS). In addition to this role, the Program Manager will be responsible for the
following tasks:
Oversees development of project definition, technical scope and budget
Defines programmatic mission requirements and objectives
Establishes programmatic requirements and recommends operational readiness to the authorization
authority
Prepares, defends and provides project budget with support from the field organizations
Reviews and provides recommendations to the Acquisition Executive on Level-0 and Level-1
baseline changes
Functions as the primary point-of-contact at DOE headquarters for project matters
Develops project performance measures, and monitors and evaluates project performance throughout
the life cycle of the project
Organizes reviews as necessary
Ensures that environment, safety and health (ES&H) requirements are implemented by the project
Coordinates with other SC offices, project sponsors and the DOE Office of Engineering and
Construction Management as needed to execute the project
Controls changes to project baselines in accordance with the PSF PEP.
Portfolio Project Director
Due to the inter-relationship of the PSF with the Hanford 300 Area cleanup activities managed by the
Richland Operations Office (RL), a Portfolio Project Director (PPD) at RL has been assigned half-time to
the project. The PPD is an experienced SES level manager who will assist the FPD by providing
guidance and advice on management of the project and facilitate communication and coordination
between PNSO and RL for the new utility infrastructure that will be funded and installed by RL for the
retained 300 Area facilities and the ultimate transfer of full operational responsibility from RL to SC.
Federal Project Director 325 Building Sub-Project
The FPD for the 325 Building Sub-Project reports to the PSF FPD and will:
Define project objectives and technical, schedule, and cost scopes.
Ensure timely completion and quality of required project documentation.
Assess contractor project performance versus contract requirements.
Proactively identify and resolve critical issues within Federal control.
Integrate and manage the timely delivery of government reviews, approvals, property, services, and
information.
Ensure the design, construction, environmental, safety, health, and quality efforts performed are in
accordance with the contract, public law, regulations, and Executive Orders
40 of 46

Evaluate and verify reported progress.

Evaluate proposed changes in accordance with the PEP change control process and make
recommendations to the PSF FPD.
Facility Transition Manager
Although facility transition is not funded as part of the PSF line item, a federal Facility Transition
Manager (FTM) has been assigned to facilitate this effort because of its importance to the project goals of
minimizing adverse impacts to the PNNL research missions and delays to the demolition and cleanup of
the Hanford 300 Area.
The FTM will:
Work with the M&O contractor and RL to execute the new utility infrastructure that will be funded
and installed by RL for the retained 300 Area facilities.
Establish PNSO policy and objectives for obtaining new utility and service provider contracts and
agreements for the retained 300 Area facilities
Provide federal oversight of PNNL research capability (staff and equipment) relocation to new and
retained facilities.
Safety Basis Review Team Lead / Nuclear Safety Analyst
Lead the Safety Basis Review Team (SBRT), as described in the SBRT charter. Review contractor
prepared nuclear safety plans and documentation. Provide advice and assistance on nuclear safety issues
as requested by the FPD.
The Contractor Project Director (CPD) is responsible and accountable for successful execution of the
Contractors project scope of work and is a key member of the IPT. The CPD:
Supports the FPD in implementing the DOE project management process.
Provides input on project documents and develops and maintains contractor project documentation.
Defines the contractor project organization.
Manages the day-to-day project execution activities.
Implements the contractor performance measurement system.
Completes project deliverables as defined in the Project Execution Plan (PEP), the approved
contractor Work Plan, the performance baseline approved at Critical Decision 2, other project
documentation and as directed by the FPD.
Proactively identifies and ensures timely resolution of critical issues within Contractors control
which impact project performance
Communicates accurate and reliable project status and performance issues to the FPD.
Identifies and manages project risks.
41 of 46

Approves changes within authority threshold in accordance with change control process defined in
the PEP.
Manages project contingency funds.
Subject Matter Expert Support
Additional support in specific disciplines will be necessary to execute the project on a periodic and
intermittent task basis and will be obtained as required, on a matrix basis, from PNSO and SC Support
Center staff. The disciplines required and anticipated sources are listed below.
PNSO: Contracting Officer, safety, health, quality, environmental permitting, security
Oak Ridge Support Center: CFO, budget, procurement, legal
Integrated Project Team Life

This charter will expire when CD-4b, Project Closeout, has been approved by the acquisition executive.
The charter is a living document and the membership will change during the life of the project. The FPD
will issue revisions to the charter periodically as necessary.
42 of 46

Attachment C Summary of DOE Order 413.3A

Requirements and Applicability to the PSF Project
DOE O 413.3A & DOE/NNSA
Implementing Manual
Requirements
Chapter/
Title
Section
Chapter I
Critical Decisions
1.
Major System (MS)
Project CDs
Applicability to Documentation
PSF
for Applicable
Requirement
Justification for Tailoring/

Non-Application &
Suggested Tailoring
NA
2.
Other Project CDs

CD-0, Approve
Mission Need
A
A
CD-1
CD-2a/3a
CD-2b/3b
The total cost of the PSF project is below the

$400 million threshold for an MS project. The
PSF project is replacement of DOE capital assets
and does meet the requirements defined in DOE
Order 413.3.
See above.
Memorandum from Deputy Secretary McSlarrow
on 9/23/2004, Approval of the Mission Need
(CD-0) for the Pacific Northwest National
Laboratory Capability Replacement Laboratories
Project.
Memorandum from Deputy Secretary Sell on
12/15/05
Acquisition Executive authority currently resides
with the DOE Deputy Secretary.
Delegate Acquisition Executive authority to the
Director of SC or their
CD-4
Environmental
restoration (ER) &
Facility Disposition
(FD) Project CDs
Baseline Change
Control
Baseline Change
Control Approval
Authority (A2 &A5)
NA
Memorandum from
Deputy Secretary
Memorandum from
Deputy Secretary
Memorandum from
Acquisition
Executive
Memorandum from Acquisition Executive authority currently resides
Acquisition
with the DOE Deputy Secretary.
Executive
NA
Not an ER or FD Project.
PEP Section 5.2
A
A
A
PEP Section 5.2

PEP Section 5.2
PEP Section 5.2
Justification of
Mission Need
3.
Chapter II
1.
2.
3.
4.
Thresholds (A3)
Variances
Programmatic
Baseline Changes
Chapter III Acquisition Process
1.
Pre-conceptual
Planning
1.1
Mission Needs
Statement (A4)
1.2
1.3
Integrated Project
A
Team
Pre-conceptual Design A
(IM)
Memorandum from
Deputy Secretary
The CRL project will establish baseline change

control thresholds that results in delegation of most
change approvals to lowest possible level while
maintaining compliance with DOE Order 413.3,
Attachment 5.
See above.
See above.
See above.
PEP Section 3.4
The CRL Project Justification for Mission Need

(8/4/2004) was submitted and approved as part of
CD-0.
An IPT has been established.
Mission Need
Statement and 300
Area Capability
Transition Plan
The PSF is a replacement project, meaning the

pre-conceptual design is the existing capabilities.
Design is being performed in accordance with
PSF programmatic requirements.
43 of 46

Implementing Manual
Requirements
1.4
System Level
Functions &
Requirements (IM)
2.

PSF
for Applicable
Requirement
A
Facilities Program
& Requirements
Document
2.1
Risk Identification &

Analysis
Preliminary Risk
A
Comparison &
Assessment (IM)
2.2
Risk Mgmt Plan (IM)
3.
3.1
Acquisition Process
Conceptual Design
Report
3.2
Design Project Data

Sheet (A4)
Preliminary Hazards
Analysis (A4)
3.4
Configuration
Management Plan
(IM)
AT
3.5
System Engineering
Plan (IM)
QA Program
Description
AT
Work Breakdown
Structure (IM)
Design Baseline
3.3
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
Earned Value
Management System
(IM)
AT
3.10
Preliminary Project
Baseline Range
4.
4.1
Acquisition Planning
Acquisition Strategy
A
(IM)
Chapter IV Project Execution

Process
Preliminary
NA
Documented Safety
Analysis (PDSA) (A4)
NEPA Documents
AT
(A4)
PEP Section 4.7

and Preliminary
Risk Analysis and
Strategy
PEP Section 5.9
and CRL project
Risk Management
Plan (RMP)

Non-Application &
Suggested Tailoring
System level functions and requirements are
identified in the CDR. The Facilities Program
and Requirements Document documents the final
scope and requirements subsequent to the facility
programming.
Draft Preliminary Risk Analysis and Strategy for

CRL project included in CDR.
A RMP has been developed to govern the process
for managing risks.
CDR
CDR submitted as part of the CD-1 package. All

design is performed in accordance with applicable
design codes, standards and requirements.
Project Data Sheets Project Data Sheets will be prepared as part of the
CD process.
Preliminary
A tailored Preliminary Hazards Analysis Report
Hazards Analysis
has been developed.
Report
PEP Section 5.3
A Configuration Management Plan has been
developed for this project. Plans for configuration
management of the technical baseline and design
are consistent with existing PNNL facility design
processes.
PEP Section 5.5
The application of systems engineering will be
tailored to meet the projects needs.
PEP Section 6.2
A summary level description of the QA Program
is included in the PSF PEP. The project QAP will
be an appendix to the PNNL Project
Implementation Plan (PIP).
PEP Section 4.3
A multilevel WBS has been developed for the
and 4.5
PSF.
PEP Section 4 and A summary level design baseline is located in the
CDR
PSF PEP. A more detailed description of the
Technical Baseline is located in the CDR.
PEP Section 5.7
A summary level discussion of the PSF EVMS is
located in the PEP. PNNL will implement a
detailed EVMS in accordance with ANSI/EIA
748-A-1998 prior to submittal of documentation
for CD-2.
PEP Section 4.8
The preliminary baseline range is summarized in
and 4.9
Section 4.8 and 4.9. Preliminary cost and
schedule information is contained in the CDR.
CRL Project
Acquisition
Strategy
The CRL Project Acquisition Strategy submitted

with the CD-1 document package.
PDSA Is Not
Required
A Hazard Analysis Report will be developed and

submitted to DOE prior to the CD-2 review.
CDR
NEPA strategy and approach is based on

obtaining an EA prior to CD-2.
44 of 46

Implementing Manual
Requirements
Finalize Performance
Measurement Baseline
(IM)
Independent Cost
Review/Estimate (A4)
Finalize Site Location
(IM)
Construction Project
Data Sheet (A4)
ES&H Document
Safety Evaluation
Report (IM)

PSF
for Applicable
Requirement
A
PEP Section 4
A

Non-Application &
Suggested Tailoring
A PMB, based on the costs/schedules/scope for
each subproject, will be developed and submitted
at CD-2.
PEP Section 5.10.3 An Independent Cost Review will be performed.
PEP Section 4.4
A
AT
A
Preliminary Design
A
(IM)
Final Design &
AT
Review (A4)
Operational Readiness AT
Review & Acceptance
Report (A4)
Project Transition to
Operations Report
(A4)
AT
Final Documented
Safety Analysis
(FDSA)
Project Closeout
Report (A4)
NA
A
The capability replacement laboratories will be

located on the PNNL Site. Considerations
include federal and private property.
Project Data Sheets Project Data Sheets will be prepared as part of the
budget process.
PNNL PMP
PNNL ES&H documentation is included in the
Integrated Safety Management Plan.
Safety Evaluation The SER documents the DOE determination that
Report (SER)
a DOE-owned facility is safe to operate in the
United States. Will be prepared as part of the
CD-2 document package.
Preliminary Design The PDR will be prepared and submitted as part
Report (PDR)
of the CD-2 document package.
PEP Section 5.10.4 DOE and PNNL will provide extensive oversight
of design
Operational
Startup and Commissioning is being performed in
Readiness Review accordance with DOE and PNNL Operational
& Acceptance
System requirements. An Operational Readiness
Report
Review and Acceptance Report will be developed
and submitted prior to the CD-4 review.
Project Transition Startup and Commissioning is being performed in
to Operations
accordance with DOE and PNNL Operational
Report
System requirements. A Project Transition to
Operations Report will be developed and
submitted prior to the CD-4 review.
PEP Section 5.11

A Project Closeout Report will be submitted at
and CRL project
CD-4b.
Closeout Report
PEP Section 5.10.6 Lessons learned reports will be generated
throughout the life of the project.
1.
1.1
Lessons Learned
A
Report (IM)
Project Execution Plan
Preliminary PEP
A
1.2
Final PEP
Preliminary PEP,
6/30/2005
PEP
1.3
Update PEP (IM)
PEP
2.
Source Selection Plan
AT
3.
Business Clearances
NA
Acquisition
Strategy
NA
AT
Energy Systems
Acquisition Advisory
Board
Chapter VI Performance
Reviews & Reporting
1.
Performance Reviews
1.1
Contractor PM System A
Review (A4)
Chapter V
PEP Section 5.10
45 of 46
A draft preliminary PEP will be developed as part

of the CD-1 document package.
The PSF PEP will be finalized and submitted with
the required CD-2 documentation.
The PSF PEP will be reviewed at least annually,
maintained, and submitted for review at each CD
level as addressed in Section 1.2.
Source Selection Plan included in the PSF
Acquisition strategy and plan.
No business clearance negotiation to be
performed.
Internal DOE/NNSA requirements per DOE
Order 413.3, Chapter V for ESAAB process.
PNNLs Project Management System will be

reviewed by DOE and OECM.


Implementing Manual
Requirements
1.2
Quarterly Project
Reviews
2.
Independent Reviews
(A2)
2.1
CD-0 Mission
Validation IPR
PSF
for Applicable
Requirement
A
PEP Section 5.10.2
2.2
AT
2.3
2.4
2.5
3.
CD-1 Mission Need

IPR (IM)
CD-2 Performance
Measurement Baseline
EIR (A4)
CD-3 Construction
Start IPR
Execution Readiness
IPR (A4)
Reporting
AT
AT
AT
AT
AT
Covered in Deputy Complete.

Secretary memo
dated 9/23/2004
See 2.1 above
Complete. The Mission Need was reviewed and
approved at CD-0.
PEP Section 5.10.3 This EIR is being planned as part of the CD-2
review process.
PEP Section 5.10.3 This IPR is being planned as part of the CD-3
review process.
PEP Section 5.10.3 This IPR is being planned as part of the CD-4
review process.
PEP Section 5.10
The FPD will generate internal management
reports. PNNL will provide a detailed monthly
report to the FPD that identifies project status,
issues and cost and schedule performance. EVMS
performance will be reported after the
performance baseline is finalized at CD-2.
Chapter
VII
1.
Additional
Requirements
Chief Operating
AT
Officer Watch List and
A7
2.
Project Manager
Development
Contractor Project
Management System
Per McSlarrow
CD-0 approval
PNNL PMP
4.
Value Engineering
AT
PEP Section 5.4
5.
Integrated Safety
Management
AT
PEP Section 6
6.
Sustainable Building
Design
AT
NA
3.

Non-Application &
Suggested Tailoring
Quarterly project reviews will be scheduled.
PEP Section 5.10
46 of 46
If significant cost and schedule variances and/or

technical issues are identified the PSF may be
placed on the Chief Operating Officer Watch List
until improvement is identified.
Applies to Federal Project Managers and
Directors.
PNNL has identified in their PMP how they will
implement all the requirements identified in the
Contractors Requirements Document, DOE O
413.3, Attachment 1
The work is being performed in accordance with
PNNL existing facility operations requirements.
A summary level discussion is included in the
PSF PEP.
An Integrated Safety Management Plan tailored
for the CRL project has been developed and is an
appendix to the PNNL PMP.
Sustainable design principles will be followed in
the siting, design, and construction of federal
facilities.

PSF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

PSF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Physical Sciences Facility (PSF)

Project Execution Plan (PEP)

Mission and Objectives ....................................................................................................................... 5

Project Description .............................................................................................................................. 7

Organization and Responsibilities....................................................................................................... 8

Resource Requirements ..................................................................................................................... 14

Project Baselines ............................................................................................................................... 17

Project Management Control and Reporting ..................................................................................... 20

Physical Sciences Facility (PSF)

Project Execution Plan (PEP)

Environment, Safety and Health ....................................................................................................... 26

10.0 Technical Analyses ........................................................................................................................... 28

Physical Sciences Facility (PSF)

Project Execution Plan (PEP)

Facilities Included in the CRL Projects Scope of Work. ........................................................................ 2

Total Project BA/BO Requirements ...................................................................................................... 14

Physical Sciences Facility (PSF)

Project Execution Plan (PEP)

Change Control Board

Department of Homeland Security

Federal Project Director

Hazards Analysis Report

Integrated Environment, Safety and Health

Leadership in Energy and Efficiency Design

Physical Sciences Facility (PSF)

Project Execution Plan (PEP)

Management and Operations

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

Office of Engineering and Construction Management

Project Assessment and Reporting System

Quality Assurance Plan

Risk Management Plan

Secretarial Acquisition Executive

total estimated cost

Work Breakdown Structure

Physical Sciences Facility (PSF)

Project Execution Plan (PEP)

Physical Sciences Facility (PSF)

Project Execution Plan (PEP)

Mission Critical Capabilities

Materials Science & Technology

Chemistry and Processing

Materials Science & Technology

Chemistry and Processing

Building 318: GPP/Expense

Certif ication & Dosimetry

Building 331: GPP/Expense

Subsurf ace Science

Building 350: IGPP

Inf ormation Analytics

Support Services Shop

Physical Sciences Facility (PSF)

Project Execution Plan (PEP)

Figure 2. CRL Work Breakdown Structure

Figure 3. PSF New Construction Site Plan

Physical Sciences Facility (PSF)

Project Execution Plan (PEP)

1.3 Approval and Revisions

Physical Sciences Facility (PSF)

Project Execution Plan (PEP)

2.0 Mission and Objectives

Physical Sciences Facility (PSF)

Project Execution Plan (PEP)